C'mon ladies, wake up and stop being used and played for political points.

It's infuriating to me as a woman that this entire controversy is being played as a "war on women" and that this asinine contraceptive mandate is for the sake of "women's health." Artificial hormones bring with them serious risks for women and pose a real danger to women's health. Pumping a woman's -- worse, a young girl's still-growing body -- full of these artificial hormones should not be anyone's idea of the right way to take care of a woman's health.

....This is the epitome of the entitlement society and mentality that we now live in. To insist that government or our employers must subsidize our sexual habits ....Not to mention the most hypocritical. We demand the government stay out of our bedrooms while also demanding the government pay for our contraception. Angry Woman

But don't worry, the Pope, for reasons of protecting children and the institution of the family and religous freedom, is backing our bishops and Republicans who will continue fighting so that women aren't tricked by Obama and feminist who reduce women to "just vaginas and uteruses" . . . (hmmm, why does this sound famliar).

Good thing some women aren’t fooled and are really concerned about health and obedience and are introducing legislating promoting these values. We should support them. I invite Danman, JJ, Tmore, and other Catholics that want to promote Catholic teachin, to support these brave women who are going against Obama and secular practices and are introducing legislation that protects Catholics! Will you join me? If no, why not? Don't be cowards and stand up for your beliefs.

I am most impressed with the bills from Ohio, Missouri, and Texas: I feel so much better now that some Democrats are joining the Republicans in supporting the Catholic position against wanton sexual behaviors.

Good thing some women aren’t fooled and are really concerned about health and obedience and are introducing legislating promoting these values. We should support them. I invite Danman, JJ, Tmore, and other Catholics that want to promote Catholic teachin, to support these brave women who are going against Obama and secular practices and are introducing legislation that protects Catholics! Will you join me? If no, why not? Don't be cowards and stand up for your beliefs.

I am most impressed with the bills from Ohio, Missouri, and Texas: I feel so much better now that some Democrats are joining the Republicans in supporting the Catholic position against wanton sexual behaviors.

Actually, it has nothing to do with protecting Catholics - it's all about protecting the institution - there is no concern for real people in this, just as there was no concern for children when bishops were protecting pedophiles in order to protect the institution.

However, the pols - always read to react to however the wind is blowing - are beginning to realize that the bishops do not speak for Catholics, but only for themselves. Santorum, the uber-Catholic, is losing the "Catholic" vote in the Republican primaries, a fact not missed by those in the Congress.

Pregnancy and childbirth have a higher mortality rate than the pill - that is fact. Pregnancy is not a disease - but it is a health condition, which is why women go to doctors when they get pregnant. Pregnancy can give rise to diseases, such as gestational diabetes etc. Most women are a bit more educated about the health issues associated with the pill AND with pregnancy than is the person quoted in your first post.

Oklahoma: When a zygote-personhood bill came before the state Senate, Sen. Constance Johnson penned an amendmentdeclaring that ejaculating anywhere outside a woman's vagina constitutes "an action against an unborn child." Bonus: Johnson also suggested that any man who impregnates a woman without her permission should pay a $25,000 fine, support the child until age 21, and get a vasectomy, "in the spirit of shared responsibility." In response to the same bill, state Sen. Jim Wilson proposed an amendment requiring the father of an unborn child to be financially responsible for its mother's health care, housing, transportation, and nourishment during pregnancyone of my favorites:

I expect the Catholic bishops to throw their suppor behind all these bills that are in accordance with their teachings.

Last year the Texas state legislature enacted huge cuts to women's health care, not only in cutting funding for family planning services but also screening for breast cancer, pap smears and other basic health services. This is all to cater to those who hate Planned Parenthood. Of course restricting the access to affordable birth control will only drive up the rate of unintended pregnancy. Texas has very little in the way of good sex education in its schools. An acquaintance of mine is a social worker at a local high school, and she has to deal with a lot of issues regarding teen pregnancy. In teaching at a community college I see many young, pregnant, unmarried women or women who had children before completing their educations who are scrambling to take care of kids (or get their own mother to do that) while going back to school. Many of these students receive state-subsidized child care, most do not. The rate of poverty and food insecurity for children in Texas is among the highest in the nation. The rate of uninsured here is also among the highest in the nation, and it is not as easy for low-income families to get their children on the state health insurance program for children, compared to many other states.

Another move made by the TX legislature last year in its infinite ignorance was to pass a law requiring a sonogram be performed 24 hours before an abortion. The law requires the ultrasound to be done by a certified provider who is required by the law to describe the internal organs of the fetus, find a heartbeat and have the patient listen to it (of course that requires a transvaginal ultrasound for most women because the fetus is at such an early stage of gestation it wouldn't be picked up by an abdominal scan), and offer to show the woman the sonograms. (Oh, but these TX Republican legislators are totally opposed to government interference in our personal lives. Yeah, right.) Planned Parenthood has been complying for 6 months, even though the requirements were being battled in courts for much of that time. The law has infuriated women, but it has not lowered the rate of abortion. It is another of the many measures "pro-life" activists have passed that do not lower the abortion rate, but cause many women to delay having their abortions as they try to scrape together the money to pay not only for the procedure but to compensate for having to miss 2 days of work, arrange child care and so on. I heard the director of the local Planned Parenthood talk about this yesterday in an interview on our local public radio station.

Gilg, in the article you linked, the author shows the true colors of so many "pro life" and religious right activists. They aren't so concerned about saving fetuses (although their concern for fetuses typically exceeds their concern for the welfare of poor children) as they are about women "getting away" with having sex. I can only guess their own sex lives must be so grim they can't stand the idea that others enjoy theirs. ISTM they view unintended pregnancy as a punishment that "bad" women deserve and must take. Of course they tend to not support government programs that help struggling families because, again, if a woman can't support her children adequately, she must be "bad," and helping them out would be enabling their "bad" behavior. As evidence, I submit to you this whack-a-doodle from Wisonsin.

Last year the Texas state legislature enacted huge cuts to women's health care, not only in cutting funding for family planning services but also screening for breast cancer, pap smears and other basic health services. This is all to cater to those who hate Planned Parenthood. Of course restricting the access to affordable birth control will only drive up the rate of unintended pregnancy. Texas has very little in the way of good sex education in its schools. An acquaintance of mine is a social worker at a local high school, and she has to deal with a lot of issues regarding teen pregnancy. In teaching at a community college I see many young, pregnant, unmarried women or women who had children before completing their educations who are scrambling to take care of kids (or get their own mother to do that) while going back to school. Many of these students receive state-subsidized child care, most do not. The rate of poverty and food insecurity for children in Texas is among the highest in the nation. The rate of uninsured here is also among the highest in the nation, and it is not as easy for low-income families to get their children on the state health insurance program for children, compared to many other states.

Another move made by the TX legislature last year in its infinite ignorance was to pass a law requiring a sonogram be performed 24 hours before an abortion. The law requires the ultrasound to be done by a certified provider who is required by the law to describe the internal organs of the fetus, find a heartbeat and have the patient listen to it (of course that requires a transvaginal ultrasound for most women because the fetus is at such an early stage of gestation it wouldn't be picked up by an abdominal scan), and offer to show the woman the sonograms. (Oh, but these TX Republican legislators are totally opposed to government interference in our personal lives. Yeah, right.) Planned Parenthood has been complying for 6 months, even though the requirements were being battled in courts for much of that time. The law has infuriated women, but it has not lowered the rate of abortion. It is another of the many measures "pro-life" activists have passed that do not lower the abortion rate, but cause many women to delay having their abortions as they try to scrape together the money to pay not only for the procedure but to compensate for having to miss 2 days of work, arrange child care and so on. I heard the director of the local Planned Parenthood talk about this yesterday in an interview on our local public radio station.

Gilg, in the article you linked, the author shows the true colors of so many "pro life" and religious right activists. They aren't so concerned about saving fetuses (although their concern for fetuses typically exceeds their concern for the welfare of poor children) as they are about women "getting away" with having sex. I can only guess their own sex lives must be so grim they can't stand the idea that others enjoy theirs. ISTM they view unintended pregnancy as a punishment that "bad" women deserve and must take. Of course they tend to not support government programs that help struggling families because, again, if a woman can't support her children adequately, she must be "bad," and helping them out would be enabling their "bad" behavior. As evidence, I submit to you this whack-a-doodle from Wisonsin.

Great posts, NJ

What I can never accommodate is the RCC bishops, especially those in the US, and their blase-blase writing off of the born-living. They wouldn't want to be truly in favor of the living in the political spectrum. I also do not accommodate their love of the male over the female. How many of these men ever dated seriously??? Especially when they had matured even a bit??? Many left their families before they had even a whisper of a thought about day-by-day family dynamics. They were fed, clothed, educated in vacuums.

Funny tale--my son was in advanced social studies in high school. He told me his teacher wanted to know where he was "getting" his political philosophy. He told her--from his mother. He wasn't a mama's boy by any means but we did talk. (He married a brilliant woman!!) My, children, including two daughters, knew what wassup with family finances, too. I met my son's ss teacher a year later and she said she thought I'd be 6 ft. tall--I was about 5ft3.

Good thing some women aren’t fooled and are really concerned about health and obedience and are introducing legislating promoting these values. We should support them. I invite Danman, JJ, Tmore, and other Catholics that want to promote Catholic teachin, to support these brave women who are going against Obama and secular practices and are introducing legislation that protects Catholics! Will you join me? If no, why not? Don't be cowards and stand up for your beliefs.

I am most impressed with the bills from Ohio, Missouri, and Texas: I feel so much better now that some Democrats are joining the Republicans in supporting the Catholic position against wanton sexual behaviors.

Just reading your post can get one angry. If Tea Party and other Republicans want to cut spending then the subject legislation is illogical. This and other similar legislation is driven by emotion, why are these fanatics against reason and science?

Wavering posted the link of Republican abandoning the bishops; I doubt the bishops will learn anything, they seem to be too obsesses with American politics and I have no clue what it will take to make the bishops focus on holiness and not politics.

the author shows the true colors of so many "pro life" and religious right activists. They aren't so concerned about saving fetuses (although their concern for fetuses typically exceeds their concern for the welfare of poor children) as they are about women "getting away" with having sex”

I got that impression too, from the Opus Dei articles and Rush Limbaugh but I didn't want to say it.

And then there are the idiots, from your link: Grothman: I think a lot of women are adopting the single motherhood lifestyle because the government creates a situation in which it is almost preferred.

Jane,

Many left their families before they had even a whisper of a thought about day-by-day family dynamics. They were fed, clothed, educated in vacuums.

That is a major reason why they sometimes come up with weird thoughts, they don't live ordinary lives and so lack an appeciation of common struggles yet, they want to tell people how to live ordinary lives.

Oklahoma: When a zygote-personhood bill came before the state Senate, Sen. Constance Johnson penned an amendmentdeclaring that ejaculating anywhere outside a woman's vagina constitutes "an action against an unborn child." Bonus: Johnson also suggested that any man who impregnates a woman without her permission should pay a $25,000 fine, support the child until age 21, and get a vasectomy, "in the spirit of shared responsibility." In response to the same bill, state Sen. Jim Wilson proposed an amendment requiring the father of an unborn child to be financially responsible for its mother's health care, housing, transportation, and nourishment during pregnancyone of my favorites:

I expect the Catholic bishops to throw their suppor behind all these bills that are in accordance with their teachings.